swpc_solar_flux

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a safe read operation. The description adds value by defining SFU units and activity thresholds, but does not disclose other behavioral aspects like return format, time range, or data source characteristics.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the operation and resource, followed by useful interpretive context. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant or vague wording.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple no-parameter tool with annotations, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does and provides context for interpreting the values. It could briefly mention that the data is typically a time series, but this is not a significant gap given the tool's simplicity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description is not required to explain parameter semantics, and it appropriately focuses on the data returned rather than parameter details.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'F10.7 cm solar radio flux data', clearly identifying the tool's function. It also explains the significance of F10.7, which distinguishes it from other SWPC tools like swpc_kp_index or swpc_sunspots.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context by stating that F10.7 is a key indicator of solar activity and provides threshold interpretations (elevated vs high activity). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternative tools for other solar indices.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.